Two-Way ANOVA Exercises Answers

I. 1)
Ha: The mean numbers of trials to criterion differ for at least two
of the 6 combinations of a level of door and a level of MSH. (2jk
/ 0 for some j and k)
=

Ho: The mean numbers of trials to criterion are the same for the 6
combinations of a level of door and a level of MSH. (2jk
= 0 for every j and k)

Assumptions:
The rats were randomly and independently chosen for each of the
six treatments. The number of trials to criterion is normally
distributed for each of the populations. Their variances are
equal.

MSexplained
Test Statistic: Fexplained
, dfexplained
5, dferror
12
MSE

. = .FW = .05

RR: Fexplained > F.05, 5, 12 = 3.11 (p-value of Fexplained < .05)

Calculation: Fexplained = 2.924 with p-value = .059 (SPSS page 3)

Decision: Fail to reject Ho.

Conclusion: There is not sufficient evidence to indicate that the mean

numbers of trials to criterion differ for at least two of the 6
combinations of a level of door and a level of MSH.

However, since the p-value = .059 is very close to .05, the analysis
of this data will continue.

Since Finteraction = 2.690 with p-value .108 (SPSS page 3), there is
not sufficient evidence to indicate that the factor door and the
dosage of MSH interact to affect the number of trials to criterion.
 Since Fdoor = .235 with p-value = .637 (SPSS page 3), there is not
sufficient evidence to indicate that the mean numbers of trials to
criterion differ for a lighted door and a darkened door.

Since Fgroup = 4.503 with p-value = .035, there is sufficient

evidence to indicate that the mean numbers of trials to criterion
differ for at least 2 of the 3 dosages of MSH.

2) SNK for the levels of MSH with . = .05

MSE
CV r
q.,r,df
error ñ

n = 6, MSE = 136.222, q.05, 3, 12 = 3.77 and q.05, 2, 12 = 3.08.

136.22 136.222
CV2
3.08
14.676 CV3
3.77
17.963
6 6

x MSH − A x MSH − B xcontrol

x MSH − A = 43.5

13.33
x MSH − B = 56.83
(14,676)
19.83* 6.50
xcontrol = 63.33
(17.963) (14.676)

There is sufficient evidence to indicate that the mean number of

trials to criterion for rats in the control group exceeds that of rats
given dose A of MSH. There is not sufficient evidence to indicate that
any other pair of population means differ.

3) See the attached interaction plots.

4) The mean number of trials to criterion for rats in the control

group differs from that of rats given either dosage of MSH.
(%1 = µcontrol - ½µMSH A - ½µMSH B =
/ 0)
 The mean number of trials to criterion for rats given dosage A of
MSH differs from that of rats given dosage B of MSH.

(%2 = 0µcontrol + µMSH A - µMSH B / 0)

=

%1: 1 -.5 -.5

c1j = 0
%:
2 0 1 -1
c2j = 0

c1jc2j= 1(0) + (-.5)(1) + (-.5)(-1) = 0 Since each of the sums = 0,

the set of contrasts {%1, %2} is an orthogonal set.

II. 1)
Ha: The mean numbers of error differ for at least two of the four
combinations of a level of anxiety and a level of task group.
(2jk =
/ 0 for some j and k)

Ho: The mean numbers of error are the same for the four combinations
of a level of anxiety and a level of task group. (2jk = 0 for
every j and k)

Assumptions:
The subjects were randomly and independently chosen for each of
the four treatments. The number of errors is normally distributed
for each of the populations. Their variances are equal.

MSexplained
Test Statistic: Fexplained
, dfexplained
3, dferror
20
MSE

. = .FW = .05

RR: Fexplained > F.05, 3, 20 = 3.10 (p-value of Fexplained < .05)

Calculation: Fexplained = 7.852 with p-value = .001 (SPSS page 3)

Decision: Reject Ho.

Conclusion: There is sufficient evidence to indicate that the mean
numbers of error differ for at least two of the four combinations of a
level of anxiety and a level of task group.

Since Finteraction = 6.442 with p-value .020 (SPSS page 3), there is
sufficient evidence to indicate that the anxiety level and the task
group interact to affect the number of errors.

Since there is evidence of an interaction, each of the four

simple main effects will be tested using .PC = .0125.

Since F = 1.19 with p-value = .288 (SPSS page 7), there is not
sufficient evidence to indicate that for low anxiety subjects the mean
number of errors made differ for the two task groups.

Since F = 21.92 with p-value = .000 (SPSS page 7), there is

sufficient evidence to indicate that for high anxiety subjects the
mean number of errors made in the presence of a person who has
completed the task is greater than when working alone.

Since F = 1.76 with p-value = .200 (SPSS page 8), there is not
sufficient evidence to indicate that for people working alone the mean
numbers of errors made differ for the two levels of anxiety.

Since F = 5.12 with p-value = .035 (SPSS page 8), there is not
sufficient evidence to indicate that for people working in the
presence of someone who has completed the task the mean numbers of
errors made differ for the two levels of anxiety.

2) See the attached interaction graphs.

3) Since there are two levels of each factor, a determination of

either a significant main effect or a significant simple main effect
would lead to a conclusion of the form the means differ for the two
levels of the factor. Hence, no pairwise analysis would be needed. A
simple examination of the pair of sample means would indicate which
population mean would be larger.
5) µ! = 7.50 (SPSS page 2)

µˆ1. = µˆ1ow. = 7.00 (SPSS page 2)

µˆ2. = µˆhigh. = 8.00 (SPSS page 2)

µˆ.1 = µˆ.alone = 4.42 (SPSS page 2)

µˆ.2 = µˆ.finisher = 10.58 (SPSS page 2)

αˆ1 = αˆlow = −.5 (SPSS page 4)

αˆ2 = αˆhigh = .5 (SPSS page 4)

βˆ1 = βˆalone = −3.08 (SPSS page 4)

βˆ2 = βˆfinisher = 3.08 (SPSS page 4)

σˆe2 = MSE = 13.683 (SPSS page 3)

"
αβ jk = x − xj. − x.k + xjk

" = αβ
αβ "
11 low ,alone = 5.83 - 7.00 - 4.42 + 7.50 = 1.91

" = αβ
αβ " = 8.17 - 7.00 - 10.58 + 7.50 = -1.91
12 low ,finisher

" = αβ
αβ "
21 high,alone = 3.00 - 8.00 - 4.42 + 7.50 = -1.92

" = αβ
αβ " = 13.00 - 8.00 - 10.58 + 7.50 = 1.92
22 high,finisher